Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
14% regression in power.top_10 at 401726:401753 |
||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Jun 28 2016
===== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===== Status: completed === Bisection aborted === The bisect was aborted because The metric values for the initial "good" and "bad" revisions do not represent a clear regression. Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error. === Warnings === The following warnings were raised by the bisect job: * Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence. ===== TESTED REVISIONS ===== Revision Mean Std Dev N Good? chromium@401725 26.8481 1.75752 18 good chromium@401753 27.0371 1.76237 18 bad Bisect job ran on: mac_retina_perf_bisect Bug ID: 623830 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests power.top_10 Test Metric: energy_consumption_mwh/energy_consumption_mwh Relative Change: 0.54% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_retina_perf_bisect/builds/1367 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9008648285263584528 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5788296895004672 | O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq | X | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback, | / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect. Thank you!
,
Jun 28 2016
,
Jul 2 2016
Moving this nonessential bug to the next milestone. For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
,
Jul 11 2016
Looks like this was just noise. |
|||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by lanwei@google.com
, Jun 28 2016